You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Evaluation of interventions to improve electronic health record documentation within the inpatient setting: a protocol for a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, February 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13643-019-0971-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lucia Otero Varela, Natalie Wiebe, Daniel J. Niven, Paul E. Ronksley, Nicolas Iragorri, Helen Lee Robertson, Hude Quan |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| France | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 65 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 11% |
| Researcher | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 15% |
| Unknown | 28 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 12% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 14% |
| Unknown | 31 | 48% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 February 2020.
All research outputs
#3,164,347
of 23,128,387 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#593
of 2,013 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,529
of 447,836 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#32
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,128,387 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,013 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 447,836 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.